Final 3
Final 3
Final 3
A Thesis Presented to
In Partial Fulfillment
By:
Bayanay, Angela Q.
Centeno, Ismael P.
2023
Approval Sheet
AL F. SANTIAGO, MSCS
Adviser
possible;
successful;
better;
Mr. Joneil Pontejos, the thesis statistician, for his
by the researchers;
be our beneficiaries;
A.Q.B
J.V.D.C
I.P.C
P.J.G.S
Dedication
A.Q.B
J.V.D.C
I.P.C
P.J.G.S
Table of Contents
Approval Sheet i
Abstract ii
Acknowledgement iii
Dedication v
List of Figures vii
List of Tables viii
List of Appendices ix
Chapter
1 The Problems and Its Background
Introduction 1
Background of the Study 5
Project Context 6
Purpose and Description 7
Objectives of the Study 9
Significance of the Study 11
Scope and Limitations of the Study 12
Definition of Terms 14
2 Review of Related Works
Related Literature 16
Related Studies 27
Synthesis of Related Works 36
Conceptual Framework 38
References 100
Appendices 106
Curriculum Vitae 137
List of Figures
Figure Pages
1 Conceptual Framework 38
3 Sign In Page 51
9 Final Confirmation 54
10 Admin Sign In 55
11 Dashboard 55
12 Users Panel 56
16 Agile Methodology 59
List of Tables
Table Pages
Gender 67
Respondents 68
Appendix Pages
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
several more.
saves a lot of time and causes less trouble for either the
attendance records.
school website and complete the request form. Think about how
available.
the schools used a manual procedure. Both the staff and the
it becomes available.
Project Context
they will find the exact document that the requester is asking
requested.
support assistants.
information data.
9
following objectives:
request.
project study.
14
Definition of Terms
business.
system.
15
quality.
request.
CHAPTER 2
Related Literature
Local Literature
systems. Keep reading if you want to learn all about the main
educational institutions.
17
a whole.
from paper documents, you can digitize them and then let the
locate what you need when you need it. This is a quick and
documents.
22
jobs.
Foreign Literature
experience.
beneficiaries.
flip sides of one coin. You need the DMS to find out where
you have been and to organize the documents you create. You
and employees can access the system and use the system more
documents.
from the ground up, at great cost and inconvenience, and the
Related Studies
study.
Local Studies
admin.
28
document security.
the staff.
system.
and paper. Having this kind of process has many flaws. Papers
Regla & Marquez (2020) stated that the system will allow
Foreign Studies
manual filing.
Tanja & Raspor, Andrej (2017). How can you live up to such
processes
desired goal.
Synthesis
Conceptual Framework
CHAPTER 3
Technical Background
system.
research.
Methodology
Requirement Analysis
School, where they can use the system to make a request for
document.
document.
Research Instrument
processing documents.
Part I……..
All the data that was used in this study were personally
that was used in this study were gathered from books and
statistical procedures:
survey conducted.
𝒇
𝑷= (𝟏𝟎𝟎)
𝒏
where;
P = percentage
f = frequency
n = total number of respondents
46
∑ 𝑓𝑥
𝑋=
𝑛
where:
X = mean
∑ = Sum of all quantities
F = Frequency
x = Legend
N = Total number of respondents
respondent’s answer.
(∑fx − ∑x)2
𝑺𝑫 = (√ )
𝒏
where;
SD = standard deviation
∑ = Sum of all quantities
f = Frequency
x = Legend
N = Total number of respondents
47
System Requirement
for every user that will register in the system, the system
admins have all the access in the system, like the number of
completed requests. The admins can also add, edit, and delete
employees of the school. The users can use the system for
document requests. Users and admins must use a Wi-Fi and other
CHAPTER 4
requirements.
Requirements Documentation
Website
Admin Panel
Agile Methodology
system.
needs:
request online.
2. Planning of sprints
system.
process.
goal.
• Each sprint week should only allow two hours for sprint
sprint planning.
Implementation Plan
1. Introduction:
2. Implementation Plan
Philip Josua
Jester
Josua
visit the school; (2) they can easily track and monitor their
requester; (4) they can notify the requester via email when
65
• Implementation Activities
(website).
features.
• Technological Infrastructure
• Laptop
• Router/Internet
66
• Mobile Phones
system.
• HTML
• PHP
• CSS
• JAVASCRIPT
• MYSQL
• Visual Studio
• Hostinger
67
Implementation Result
Table 1
in terms of gender
Male 18 72.00 1
Female 7 28.00 2
TOTAL 25 100.00
are males.
68
Table 2
respondents
Students 21 84.00 1
16
Employees 4 2
.00
TOTAL 25 100.00
Table 3
WEIGHTED VERBAL
INDICATOR Rank
MEAN INTERPRETATION
1. The proposed system is
3.56 Agree 4
easily accessible
2. The proposed system
3.64 Agree 2
provides conveniency
3. The proposed system is
very helpful in 3.56 Agree 4
requesting a documents.
4. The proposed system is
able to eliminate the
3.56 Agree 4
hassle of requesting a
documents
5. The proposed system is
way more better than the
3.72 Agree 1
manual approach for
requesting a documents.
GENERAL WEIGHTED MEAN 3.61 AGREE
weighted mean of 3.64; and they also agreed that the proposed
Table 4
Male 62 51.67 1
Female 58 48.33 2
Table 5
respondents
Students 90 75.00 1
Employees 10 8.33 3
Experts 20 16.67 2
Table 6
Students/ I.T./ CS
Composite
Employees Experts Ran
Indicator
W.M W.M W.M k
V.I. V.I. V.I.
. . .
1. All of the
defined tasks
and user
objectives are 4.17 Agree 4.45 Agree 4.31 Agree 1
covered by the
system.
(Completeness)
2. The system
provides the
necessary level
of precision ad 3.97 Agree 4.40 Agree 4.19 Agree 2
accurate
outcomes.
(Correctness)
3. The system is
designed to make
it easier to
complete
3.92 Agree 4.35 Agree 4.14 Agree 3
specific
activities.
(Appropriateness
)
GENERAL WEIGHTED 4.0 AGRE 4.4 AGRE 4.2 AGRE
MEAN 2 E 0 E 1 E
73
with weighted mean of 4.17; they also agreed that the system
with composite mean of 4.31; they also agreed that the system
Table 7
Students/ I.T./ CS
Composite
Employees Experts
Indicator Rank
W.M. V.I. W.M. V.I. W.M. V.I.
1. A request is
processed by
the system, and
3.85 Agree 4.30 Agree 4.08 Agree 1
a result is
provided. (Time
Behaviour)
2. The system
employs servers
and other
resources to
3.81 Agree 4.05 Agree 3.93 Agree 3
access data
from other
apps. (Resource
Utilization)
3. The system can
continue to
function even
when a lot of
people are 4.00 Agree 4.05 Agree 4.03 Agree 2
trying to
access it at
once.
(Capacity)
GENERAL WEIGHTED
3.89 AGREE 4.13 AGREE 4.01 AGREE
MEAN
76
with weighted mean of 3.85; they also agreed that the system
with composite mean of 4.08; they also agreed that the system
Table 8
compatibility
Students/ I.T./ CS
Composite
Employees Experts Ran
Indicator
W.M W.M W.M k
V.I. V.I. V.I.
. . .
1. The system may
employ similar
3.6 Agre 4.1 Agre 3.8 Agre
service 2
0 e 5 e 8 e
operations. (Co-
existence)
2. Through the use
of interfaces
(such as Web
Services
Description
Language) and
3.9 Agre 4.1 Agre 4.0 Agre
communication 1
0 e 0 e 0 e
protocols, the
system enables
system
interaction.
(Interoperabilit
y)
GENERAL WEIGHTED 3.7 AGRE 4.1 AGRE 3.9 AGRE
MEAN 5 E 3 E 4 E
79
with weighted mean of 4.15; they also agreed that the system
of 4.13.
80
of 3.94.
81
Table 9
Students/ I.T./ CS
Composite
Employees Experts Ran
Indicator
W.M W.M W.M k
V.I. V.I. V.I.
. . .
1. The system
forbids
making
mistakes by
3.7 Agre 4.3 4.0 Agre
using Agree 2
3 e 5 4 e
incorrect
inputs. (User
Error
Protection)
2. The system is
accessible. 4.1 Agre 4.5 Strongl 4.3 Agre
1
(Accessibilit 3 e 5 y Agree 4 e
y)
GENERAL WEIGHTED 3.9 AGRE 4.4 4.1 AGRE
AGREE
MEAN 3 E 5 9 E
4.19.
83
Table 10
reliability
Students/ I.T./ CS
Composite
Employees Experts
Indicator Rank
W.M. V.I. W.M. V.I. W.M. V.I.
1. The system
responds to a
client's
3.62 Agree 4.40 Agree 4.01 Agree 2
information
request.
(Maturity)
2. The system is
accessible
whenever a
3.94 Agree 4.35 Agree 4.15 Agree 1
request is
submitted.
(Availability)
GENERAL WEIGHTED
3.78 AGREE 4.38 AGREE 4.08 AGREE
MEAN
with weighted mean of 4.40; they also agreed that the system
4.08.
Table 11
Students/ I.T./ CS
Composite
Employees Experts Ran
Indicator
W.M W.M W.M k
V.I. V.I. V.I.
. . .
1. Only the
authorized
person is given
Agre Strongl Agre
access by the 3.86 4.55 4.21 1
e y Agree e
system.
(Confidentiality
)
2. The system
develops methods
to demonstrate
Agre Agre
that the 3.77 4.10 Agree 3.94 2
e e
information is
delivered. (Non-
Repudiation)
GENERAL WEIGHTED AGRE AGRE
3.82 4.33 AGREE 4.08
MEAN E E
86
3.82.
4.08.
88
Table 12
maintainability
Students/ I.T./ CS
Composite
Employees Experts Ran
Indicator
W.M W.M W.M k
V.I. V.I. V.I.
. . .
1. The system can
be changed
effectively
and
efficiently
without
3.7 Agre 4.2 Agre 4.0 Agre
causing errors 2
9 e 5 e 2 e
or lowering
the quality of
the finished
result.
(Modifiability
)
2. The ease and
effectiveness
which a
4.0 Agre 4.4 Agre 4.2 Agre
system's test 1
3 e 5 e 4 e
criteria can
be defined.
(Testability)
GENERAL WEIGHTED 3.9 AGRE 4.3 AGRE 4.1 AGRE
MEAN 1 E 5 E 3 E
89
with weighted mean of 3.79; they also agreed that the ease
of 3.91.
with composite mean of 4.02; they also agreed the ease and
of 4.13.
91
Table 13
portability
Students/ I.T./ CS
Composite
Employees Experts
Indicator Rank
W.M. V.I. W.M. V.I. W.M. V.I.
1. The system is
flexible whenever
there is a
3.78 Agree 4.10 Agree 3.94 Agree 1
changes in the
platform.
(Adoptability)
2. The system is
easily
3.53 Agree 3.85 Agree 3.69 Agree 2
replaceable.
(Replaceability)
GENERAL WEIGHTED
3.66 AGREE 3.98 AGREE 3.82 AGREE
MEAN
with weighted mean of 3.78; they also agreed that the system
92
with composite mean of 3.94; they also agreed that the system
of 3.69.
3.82.
93
CHAPTER 5
Summary of Findings
administration.
objectives:
25010.
Conclusions
quality.
99
Recommendations
requirements.
References
Dizon, P.J, Jacob, M.J, Ko, J., Reyes, J.J, Domingo, M.,
Rodriguez, E. (2017). University of Santo Tomas Faculty of
Medicine Document Management System (MDMS). Manila
International Conference.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:FjM5_F
CZHooJ:uruae.org/siteadmin/upload/AE0117510.pdf+&cd=23&hl=f
il&ct=clnk&gl=ph&client=avast-a-1
http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv14t45v5.17
Appendix A
Letter to Adviser
107
Appendix B
Appendix C
Letter to Statician
109
Appendix D
Letter to Grammarian
110
Appendix E
Letter to Beneficiary
111
Appendix F
Endorsement Form
112
Appendix G
Consultation Form
113
Appendix H
Letter to Panelist
114
Appendix I
System Flowchart
115
Appendix J
Appendix K
Appendix L
Appendix M
Survey Questionnaire
Pre=Survey
123
124
Post Survey
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
Appendix N
Appendix O
Appendix P
User Guide
137
Curriculum Vitae
138
139
140